• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Audiophilia - From skeptic to believer

ExtremeSkeptic said:
(snip)

If you were swimming in an ocean full of sharks who want to eat you, would you want attention by saying "My flesh is very tasty for all you sharks, I can't deny the truth, oh well, there goes my leg...and my arm..". That's what I do, I tell the truth and don't care how much it hurts me because it just makes me stronger. I'm on a one man mission while the skeptics are weak minded followers of a cult who can't think on their own. If someone needs books to tell them what to do, then there's a problem.
Click to expand...

See, when you say stuff like this, it makes you look unreasonable and dogmatic. You continue to paint "skeptics" with a broad brush, apparently ignoring what the word actually means or implies.

It's like when you responded to my discussion about the video upconverting with what basically amounted to "well, have you tried it?!" rather than actually talking about any of the points I raised.
 
illogical said:
the fundamental issue is that the coca cola you drank, or the girl you just slept with, affect the final sound more than cables. you are forgetting that humans are not more accurate than test gear, in many cases.
Click to expand...
That's the problem with skeptics, if their system sounds different every time they listen to it, then how can they hear a difference between equipment?
When I turn on my system, the two weeks warm-up process happens exactly the same way. I write down everything into my logs (this year I have written 2 MB). The ambient temperature, burn-in volume etc. It all happens the same way always.
If I leave my system over night at 1dB lower volume than normally, then it sounds edgy on the next day, and if I leave it at 1dB too high volume it sounds too warm on the next day. I have experimented with this for over a year, it never changes. I do blind tests every day because my normal listening and blind listening are exactly the same, I don't look under my table to see what is plugged in, I look into my logs instead and explain what I'm hearing.
It's the same with many audiophiles. It's a sport and skeptics know nothing about skill. When they watch pro sports on TV they are clueless, but since a number pops up on the screen they believe it because it is "measured".

It's pretty obvious that skeptics don't take anything seriously, they have no idea, they just sit there with their measurement devices and books. Like you said, they are sleeping with girls and listen to the music in the background. Then they say tweaks don't make a difference. How can a person like that have any credibility?
 
JonnyFive said:
See, when you say stuff like this, it makes you look unreasonable and dogmatic. You continue to paint "skeptics" with a broad brush, apparently ignoring what the word actually means or implies.

It's like when you responded to my discussion about the video upconverting with what basically amounted to "well, have you tried it?!" rather than actually talking about any of the points I raised.
Click to expand...
The problem is you were assuming other humans wouldn't see a difference just because you didn't see it yourself, guess who's the one with the broad brush... Why would I upconvert if I haven't done hours of comparisons? I do the same with audio, if I don't hear a difference, I remove the tweak. If I have a tweak that I don't yet know if it makes a difference, I remove it, I don't want it to be in my system if I don't know what it does.
 
ExtremeSkeptic said:
Because other audiophiles are too weak to handle the biggest skeptics. Even the little skeptic trolls entering the audiophiles' home is too much for them.
Click to expand...

Why did you claim you did a double blnd test and link to a video in which the test failed and was turned into a test that was not double blind? Are you too weak to do a proper double blind test and report the results truthfully?
 
Last edited:
If he accepted the results of the proper test then he'd have to accept he's wrong about a lot: like his 'heightened' audio discrimination abilities.
 
alfaniner said:
What would it take to convince you that you can not hear a difference?
Click to expand...
The audiophiles don't need someone else to tell them what they are hearing, unless they have hearing damage. It is better to remain unbiased and don't trust anyone but yourself. I don't believe what anyone says, not even after it has been "proven". But for some reason the skeptics suddenly change their minds after proof is written on little piece of paper. Why didn't the skeptics believe it before? Because they don't have a mind of their own, they need someone else to say what is true and what isn't. They are afraid to use their own mind, because they are afraid to be wrong. But they fail to realize, being wrong about something makes you stronger. Skeptics need to face their fears, otherwise they remain weak. Try some tweaks and find out the truth by yourselves.
 
Mr. Scott said:
Why did you claim you did a double blnd test and link to a video in which the test failed and was turned into a test that was not double blind? Are you too weak to do a proper double blind test and report the results truthfully?
Click to expand...
The problem with skeptics is that they can't think of multiple things at the same time, they can't see how they are connected to each other, they just see them as separates which they also measure separately. They fail to see the big picture, they just see little pieces of the puzzle and measure one at a time.

A skeptic playing chess starts measuring the distance between the squares on the board and the shape of the pieces. How is that going to work? It's the same with audio, you need to see the big picture to fully understand it.

Skeptics are like robots because the measurement device is their leader. Hopefully soon there will be a cure for the skeptics. I don't think the IQ level is the issue because monkeys can see the bigger picture better than them, there must be something else in the brain that causes these flaws. In the future I will experiment on them to find the truth and help them get out from their illness.
 
Last edited:
ExtremeSkeptic said:
A skeptic playing chess starts measuring the distance between the squares on the board and the shape of the pieces. How is that going to work? It's the same with audio, you need to see the big picture to fully understand it.
Click to expand...

Your reason to pick a fight on the JREF forum is out of hubris, then. That also is why believers like kleinman and buzzlightyear engage skeptics, no doubt.

I also thought of a chess analogy:

If you really are so tough, and so right, then why do you have to cheat? It's a weak person who wins at chess by toppling the chess board, changing the rules mid-game, leaving the board when they are in check, and declaring themselves the winner. That's basically what you do. Cheaters are losers. Refusing to answer fair questions shows us you are a coward.

ES, show us you're not a wuss and answer this question without changing the subject:

Why did you claim you did a double blnd test and link to a video in which the test failed and was turned into a test that was not double blind? Are you too much of a wuss to do a proper double blind test and report the results truthfully?
 
Last edited:
Paulhoff said:
More of his work, I mean jokes.

(link deleted)

Paul

:) :) :)
Click to expand...

Paulhoff! Linking to those pictures is a violation of the new forum regulations. Everybody... look at them quickly before the mods delete the link!

New Rule 2:You will not post anything that is considered indecent, pornographic, obscene, or contains excessive reference to violence or explicit sexual acts. This includes representational artwork as well as photographic or video media and includes linking directly to such content from the Forum.
Click to expand...


Now I might have to fall back on my policy of not attempting rational debate with the emotionally disturbed.
 
Last edited:
Mr. Scott said:
Your reason to pick a fight on the JREF forum is out of hubris, then. That also is why believers like kleinman and buzzlightyear engage skeptics, no doubt.

I also thought of a chess analogy:

If you really are so tough, and so right, then why do you have to cheat? It's a weak person who wins at chess by toppling the chess board, changing the rules mid-game, leaving the board when they are in check, and declaring themselves the winner. That's basically what you do. Cheaters are losers. Refusing to answer fair questions shows us you are a coward.

ES, show us you're not a wuss and answer this question without changing the subject:

Why did you claim you did a double blnd test and link to a video in which the test failed and was turned into a test that was not double blind? Are you too much of a wuss to do a proper double blind test and report the results truthfully?
Click to expand...
I already answered but skeptics don't have a mind of their own to understand it. The test was double blind from the beginning to the end. After an hour of listening I made my guess and went into the closet to look if I was right, and I was. If there's an earthquake, you need to include it into your answer, otherwise your answer will always be wrong. Everything you are hearing needs to be explained. If you don't explain it all, then you fail. If you only answer yes or no, then it's a failed test and will always be. But for some reason the skeptics think it's a valid test and everything else than yes or no is invalid. Like I said, they are only able to measure one thing at a time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom